- cross-posted to:
- usa@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- usa@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
Honestly we need her in the Senate for at least two terms before sheās president, once sheās served her terms as president sheāll be stuck as powerless as Obama probably feels rn, letās milk having someone like her for as long as possible, and that starts with her taking that feckless shit head Schumerās Senate seat.
poor aoc, great leadership qualities but when she had a chance to ditch the dsa she doubled down on the commie cesspit
maybe by the time she does run the mamdani feedback loop will have turfed out the commie mystics
deleted by creator
Ok, six senate terms then.
Exactlyā¦ this is the way. Sheās not electable until sheās similar in age to Susan Collins.
Fuck everything about this; strike while the iron is hot or be ruled by pedofascists forever. You wonāt get another chance. You do not realize the danger we are all in.
She can serve in congress after her presidential terms, no?
No president leaves office popular enough to win a race for a Senate seat
Edit: *in our modern era, for the pedants
Iām certain that isnāt true. They are just normally done with all the shit and donāt want to deal with a lot of the same shit but with the addition of being out ruled by any of the other assholes in Congress.
Andrew Johnson
Obama is only āpowerlessā because he has chosen to be.
Taft became the Chief Justice of The US Supreme Court after leaving the office of president.
No legislator is more valuable sitting as one of 100 for a decade or two than taking their turn as president.
I get what youāre saying but sheāll do much more good as President than sitting in Congress.
Trump showed just how much power the office has, for someone willing to wield it.
Obama could totally run for Senate at any point. Presidents have done it before
He could probably win a seat on Tuesday if they announced it today lol
Oh man if you put her in the senate for two terms the leftists will have so much ammunition why they hate her.
the leftists
the fascist propagandists, I think you mean
There is some overlap in that venn diagram yes but a lot of leftists are decent people.
Yes! This!
Nah. Retiring after a presidency is a tradition, not a law. Hit them while you have momentum from midterms (hopefully).
Then if she still wants anything to do with this trash fire she can just go back to being senator.
Itās probably a tradition for a good reason. I suspect that 8 years of being president is exhausting and leaves even the best of us spent physically, mentally and emotionally (current golfer in chief being a notable exception)
Obama is still young enough that after a long break now he could do another Senate term or a relatively brief federal judge shipfor 5to7 years comfortably.
Even lazy-ass Trump is not immune to the rapid aging affect of being president. The difference is that itās usually due to the stress of trying to effectively run the country, while his is due to his manic narcissism from being in the spotlight 24/7.
Mostly because a lot of recent presidents are too old to do anything else. The rest made enough money not to want to.
Itās a symbolic run to shift the Overton window in the right direction and to take some of the lightning off some more moderate candidate, who will look less radical next to her.
Itās so ridiculous saying moderate candidate would look less radical next to her, there is nothing radical about AOC, Bernie, El-Sayid, Mamdani, yet here you are carrying the enemyās water and showing how biased they made you by describing them as radical, when you donāt have to at all.
I get what your saying is meaning the voters, but my point is how is making sure people have healthcare, quality education, clean air & water, radical? The rich have done such a masterful job brainwashing the shit out of our society over the centuries of disinformation and religious indoctrination.
Dude please give it a rest. Weāre talking about how candidates are perceived in the general election. You know this is full of distortions, double standards, lies, and many dated associations.
Giving me shit for calling clean air radical only shows you donāt know how to have a meta conversation about political discourse itself and are on a hair-trigger to give speeches at any provocation.
I donāt think the world or America can wait that long.
Red Star, whose member Megan Romer is one of DSAās two national cochairs, has expressed āserious doubtsā about throwing its weight behind her, citing a lack of āpolitical and practical alignment with DSA.ā Marxist Unity Group and Springs of Revolution have questioned moves toward an early endorsement and stressed the importance of holding socialist elected officials accountable. Liberation, a much smaller Maoist caucus, has rejected the idea of making her the standard-bearer of the socialist movement.
Well, those people are fucking idiotsā¦
Luckily no organization is going to be able to just name a candidate.
Whoever it eventually is, will have to win a full 50 state primary. And even if the DSA is outspokenly against her (or any other progressive) it just wonāt fucking matter.
Progressive policy is whatās popular and what voters are eager to flock to. Not fucking Maoism.
No one wants Maoism, and the people ignorant enough to think they do, shouldnāt be listened to under any circumstances, they donāt even know what terms theyāre using mean, or even worse they do and actually want Maoismā¦
Holding that āpolitical power grows out of the barrel of a gunā,[38] Maoism emphasises the ārevolutionary struggle of the vast majority of people against the exploiting classes and their state structuresā, which Mao termed a peopleās war. Mobilising large parts of rural populations to revolt against established institutions by engaging in guerrilla warfare, Maoist Thought focuses on āsurrounding the cities from the countrysideā.
Maoism views the industrial-rural divide as a major division exploited by capitalism, identifying capitalism as involving industrial urban developed First World societies ruling over rural developing Third World societies.[39] Maoism identifies peasant insurgencies in particular national contexts as part of a context of world revolution, in which Maoism views the global countryside as overwhelming the global cities.[40] Due to this imperialism by the capitalist urban First World toward the rural Third World, Maoism has endorsed national liberation movements in the Third World.[40]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maoism#Components
It would literally be a bunch of MAGA storming cities and killing anyone that has an education, Jan 6th on a national scale, with plenty of public executions, just like under Mao.
The fuck is the DSA doing letting self identified Maoists into their tent?
Tankies always roll over their feet
Whatās crazy is thereās 31 different flavors of communism that doesnāt require unquestioning loyalty to a supreme leader, and tankies can all just easily choose to support any of them.
Keep every last good thing they claim to support, and just ditch the roving gangs of murderers and literal tanks crushing anyone that doesnāt 100% agree with themā¦
But they wonāt, because the lust for violence is why theyāre tankies in the first place, instead of any of the rational flavors of communism. Theyāre not tankies for the communism, itās just a path to acceptable violence against an out group
Theyāre not tankies for the communism, itās just a path to acceptable violence against an out group
Ironically this can be applied to a lot of your common folk fash supporters too. Some people just want to watch the world burn and donāt really care what path they have to take to get us there.
I agree but can we still have a little murder? As a treat? There are a few people thatā¦wellā¦
Thereās less than 1,000 billionaires in america, and they control over $8,100,000,000,000ā¦
They donāt need to be murdered though, you donāt get to be a billionaire without commiting enough crimes to be jailed for life. Itās just our legal system is a joke and they have more resources than the government.
-
Seize their resources
-
Prosecute them and give them a court appointed attorney
-
Nothing, we literally have to do nothing after that.
No roving gangs, no guillotines, throw them in the same ocean they throw us.
Completely ethical and moral, and that shit matters. Because how you start a new society influences it the entire time it exists.
Once their wealth is gone, all the underlings will be scrambling to turn states evidence, no one hates billionaires more than the people who have latched onto them to siphon off wealth. The ones who actually have to interact with them, clean up messes, and know where both literal and figurative bodies are buried.
The only thing that puts billionaires out of reach of consequences is their billions we just have to remove that and let nature do the rest
Its the first step of your plan that is really the sticking point. They really donāt like doing that. And they have a lot of ways of avoiding it and harming those who tried. I love the way you frame it all but there is no way that that is going to happen peacefully. They would pay for roving gangs themselves to stoke fear long before they allowed it.
I donāt think you understand how numbers workā¦
Thereās less than 1,000 billionaires, thereās like 330,000,000 Americans
Thatās 1 billionaire against 330,000 Americansā¦
Do you have any idea how many guns 330,000 random Americans have?
Right so then there will be some murder, as I said. You canāt just ask them politely for their money. Even if you show up and demand it with guns, they will have guns of their own, and will shoot back.
-
Theyāre being in solidarity with the left. Which we should all do.
with the left
Buddyā¦
In 1978 the CCP split from Maoists, because the Maoists were too extreme
Do you have any idea how many people died because of Maoism?
Jung Chang and Jon Halliday contend that implementation of Maoist thought in China was responsible for as many as 70 million deaths during peacetime,[118] with the Cultural Revolution, the Anti-Rightist Campaign of 1957ā1958,[119] and the Great Leap Forward. Active campaigns, including party purges and āreeducationā, resulted in imprisonment or the execution of those deemed contrary to the implementation of Maoist ideals.[120] Some historians have argued that because of Maoās land reforms during the Great Leap Forward which resulted in famines, thirty million perished between 1958 and 1961. By the end of 1961, the birth rate was nearly cut in half because of malnutrition
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maoism#Criticism_and_implementation
Seriously, do you have any idea what Maoism actually is?
Theyāre authoritarians. Thatās not āthe leftā.
Most āMaoistsā have literally no idea what Maoism is.
In 1978 the CCP split from Maoists, because the Maoists were too extreme
And because of it, I get to hear you lot constantly whining about how China is bad because it has billionaires. Well, guess what the ones who didnāt want reforms to allow billionaires were called š
I am not a Maoist, and Iām critical of them, however, Maoists do not believe in directly copying every policy Mao ever did. The more relevant movement to look at is the Black Panthers, who were Maoists, and who American Maoists are more likely inspired by than Mao himself.
fuck is the DSA doing letting self identified Maoists
All of the groups mentioned in your quote from the article are opposing AOC because of her stance on Palestine not being strong enough. It has nothing to do with her ānot being maoist enoughā.
A ceasefire in Gaza is extremely popular among the electorate, so this stance is pretty solid according to your āflock to progressive idealsā argument. Linking to the wikipedia page on Maoism to make your point here makes absolutely no sense. Especially considering the liberation maoists are stated as being āa much smaller maoist caucus [within the DSA]ā right there.
If you want to make an argument that there should be no hesitation in endorsing her despite her support for the iron dome and support for Biden/Harris with them āworking tirelesslyā behind the scenes on a ceasefire, be my guest.
Holy fuck go back to Reddit
Youāre telling the only person in this thread with a brain to go back to reddit?
We must have the echo chamber properly resonant
Luckily no organization is going to be able to just name a candidate.
Whoever it eventually is, will have to win a full 50 state primary. And even if the DSA is outspokenly against her (or any other progressive) it just wonāt fucking matter.
Uh thatās not how that works. Any candidate needs people to organize and get out the vote for them, and for a leftwing candidate those tend to disproportionately come from the hard left. This means that for someone like AOC, the DSA might not be essential but itās really nice to have.
Weāre who got her elected in 18 - NYC DSA was the foot power
Semi-relatedly: I donāt have personal experience in the DSA, but a friend heavily into political party activism gave up going to DSA meetings because the leadership and structure was completely disorganized, ineffectual and instead concerned with infighting and power-struggles. It did not seem like an organization built to run a successful presidential campaign.
So reading statements like this seems in line with those stories. If theyāre ready to preliminarily sabotage their best candidate for failing to be a specific flavor of faction, they clearly are not going to be productive at election time.
AOC, however, seems like a great candidate and one that would run a great campaign with the resources and organization of the Democratic party (assuming the traditional neoliberal factions remain not in charge).
The thing is, thereās ānational DSAā theyāre the ones who didnāt endorse AOC and are apparently full of Maoistsā¦
Then thereās a shit ton of ālocalā DSAās, and the one in NYC kept endorsing her.
The national seems to want to latch onto to the popularity of anyone remotely socialist, and then if that politician doesnāt do everything the Maoists want, they try to co-opt their popularity and throw them under the bus.
Anyways, thatās how you end up with āthe DSAā doing great things, and doing absolutely mindless shit like telling people AOC is conservative and people shouldnāt vote.
Itās not one solid organization. And large parts of it are run by idiots
Sounds like itās ripe for being taken over.
Iād sure rather vote for her than Harris or Newsom and realistically, idk who else is gonna run.
Iām gotta get downvoted and cause a stir with this. Here goes anyway for the all of 5 people it might reach.
I would love. FUCKING LOVE for a candidate like AOC to get elected president of the United States. Love it.
HOWEVER.
Until there is enough power transferred in the senate and the house to candidates that would remove the current structure of how we elect the executive office; they are not electable.
See, you read that sentence thinking what I said was an opinion and pessimism. It was not. It was based in the statistics of how Americans vote and how strong the votes in various states are in a first past the post electoral system that uses an electoral college.
As it stands, and Nate Silver backs this math as well, the electoral college requires a moderate democratic candidate to overcome a 3.7 point disadvantage. That might sound small. It isnāt small. Itās the margin of victory in many races so, you effectively need to more than double the current margin of victory for a candidate, and so it when further left candidates have a harder time than that.
Jeff Jackson could make a run for office in 2028-2032 and be a candidate that historically could get elected. Statistically.
AOC is just not electable in the current structure of the electoral college and state first past the post voting that still persists in most states.
You run the virtue candidate and lose the election.
The same was true of Harris in 2024. Not because we donāt deserve a black woman president or that she couldnāt do the job.
She wasnāt fucking electable in this racist, sexiest voting base.
I get we want better candidates, but you can go too far and effectively give the election to the fascist asshole, and frankly the country canāt have that happen again post Trump. It will be the end of democracy as we know it if It does.
I know that isnāt what folks want to hear but the math is the math.
deleted by creator
Yeah, I agree. I can understand why people think America āisnāt readyā for a woman president; two women losing to Trump isnāt great. But also, a part of me thinks maybe America is ready for a woman president, just not Clinton or Harris. Neither was ever a particularly popular candidate, and as you say, Harris never even won a primary
Harris lost on more than just the racism and sexism vote though?
She was bland. Did nothing to distance herself from Bidens unpopular policies AND was running against someone who made promises that they never intended to keep. She had zero interest from voters BEFORE the campaign started.
AOC already has a name for herself and what she stands for. She doesnāt need to compete against lies, because theyāve already shown their ass. It wonāt be effective the second time around. Sheās popular among a much larger amount of demographics. She wonāt be up against Trump either, who has repeatedly demonstrated that heās the pillar on the entire R platform. The only pillar.
I have optimism because of the fdr effect. After a really shitty far right, we have hopes of electing a leftist
People said Trump was statistically unelectable, too š¤·
Not anyone with a stats background.
In fact it was his election to lose.
Iām telling you that Democratic party operatives whose entire job is electoral statistics assured me that he was unelectable. I disagreed, and it turned out I was sadly right.
I respect your respect for statistics and statisticians, but I donāt believe their predictions are as accurate as they were a few decades ago given the current political reality. āWinning elections based off of statisticsā has been the Democrats entire thing since like literally the Tammany Hall days and it isnāt as consistently reliable as it used to be for a lot of factors that could be sumed up as the increasing complexity of political society.
The difference is he proved that a huge population is very racist, sexist, and okay with rapist and pedophile being elected.
The election system is rigged against large blue states/ cities with how the senate and house are calculated
Not to be that guy but people kinda knew about Bill Clinton and still championed his politics. Like it wasnāt just a cheating scandal he was in a position of power and groomed an 18 year old, was close with Epstein, etc.
I think America has long proved that it was willing to vote for rapist pedophiles, or racist far right supremacists (Reagan).
While it is pretty blatant and specifically bad in Trumpās case, idk how you could support someone who is so obviously guilty of pedophilia, All victims of the Epstein racket deserve closure and justice, even if that means cracking down the hammer āon both sidesā, with Chomsky, Clinton, Trump, etc.
If bill did anything with epstein he should go down too. The fact they pulled him and Hillary into testify and nothing happens makes me think heās clean there.
I think thereās no way anyone that involved with Epstein like bill was is ācleanā. You have to be willfully ignorant to believe that. He groomed a teenager as president.
Why would he testify against himself? Why would you testify against your spouse? You have a lot of faith in someone heavily involved in a pedophile ring. I wouldnāt ever suggest Trump is innocent because he wouldnāt testify, of course he wouldnāt!
Stats only work until they donāt. Statisticians are great with simple logic, not so great when some of the same people that voted Trump voted Mamdani and AOC. The political calculus is shifting in this country and now is the best chance we have of a sudden takeover. You are right that political shifts usually need to be senate and congress first (and states and counties and cities) but I think the normal political rules donāt hold as strong right now. If she can win a primary, she can win the presidency. Harris couldnāt overcome racism and sexism because she had little to offer.
I worked in Dem politics for the first Obama election. He was so popular that he regularly had racists committing to voting for him. When we got regional or national polling we would regularly hear from polling companies that people would answer polls with (paraphrasing) āIām voting for the n-word, I might be racist, but Iām not stupidā. Also we had a white lady volunteer in one of the local county campaign offices that regularly used racial epithets like the n-word and she was sent home cause no one knew what to do about it.
Donāt expect predictable logic from voters.
thereās more nuance than that. If AOC support is coupled with heavy (and popular) DSA representation in both chambers she may actually stand a chance. So the focus right now should be elsewhere which is not to say AOC endorsement should seize, but that for that to become reality a lot of things have to fall into place. Also, just as Bernieās āfailedā candidacy did AOC challenge will force DNC to acknowledge itās leftmost side and incorporate itās agenda.
Agreed. The US electorate has far too many ignorant bigots and the current power structure likes it that way. HOWEVER, this is kind of a self-solving problem - if AOC were actually able to get through a primary with most of the Democratic and all of the Republican party apparatus gunning against her, she actually would have a chance. So best option is to run her in the primary, and any other progressives in the future, to gauge whether the US electorate is still full of rotten people.
Harris had to run a half a campaign. I feel that was the bigger factor. you arenāt wrong about the rest of it though.
You talk about statistics and you say you would love her as a president, but then you call her a āvirtue candidateā, and your real opinion is showing. You may as well have called her DEI.
One of us doesnāt know what āvirtue candidateā means, and Iām pretty sure itās you. I understood it to mean āthe candidate with high ethical standardsā or āthe candidate that focuses on integrity and decency for all constituents rather than attacking the opponentā. Idk what that has to do with DEI.
I read that with a positive connotation, at least towards her.
That is, the virtue candidate is the most virtuous one. The best person. The one the world needs. The one you choose when you donāt want to game theory your way into your vote.
But they are not the person the world WANTS, presumably.
The negativity is cast more on the person choosing AOC, the way I initially read it. By choosing the virtue candidate, they are virtue signaling their purity of leftness or whatever. They refuse to compromise and join a coalition behind somebody electable. (again, Iām just discussing the term reflecting more positively on her in my interpretation ā I am NOT arguing that she is in fact a virtue cabdidate or unelectable. )
I donāt want to hear it but Iām glad you said it.
AOC is my second favorite serving politician after Bernie, she would be a great President.
But Iām afraid that the Democratic leadership will squash her, as they did to Bernie. Sheās pro worker, and the Ds abandoned labor long ago (and they were paid well to do so).
If she runs, I am voting for her, whether itās with Democrats or DSA or Green.
DNC want to keep her away from Schumerās senate seat.
Schumer is 76. He should retire. This is ridiculous, go out and enjoy your life. Advocate for AIPAC. Do something else.
What school of propaganda are you representing?
What part of your colon are you looking thru to see my comment as pro schumer?
Are you posting from tel aviv?
I assumed I was agreeing with you.
Every time I get a text pretending to be from Shumer begging for donations I cringe at how many people just yelled fuck you at their phone. Doddering bastard.
Aināt happening. The US is too racist and sexist
I love AOC and wish you were wrongā¦ Buy after two women losing in a row to the biggest piece of shit imaginable I just donāt have trust nor desire to roll the dice again.
I donāt think it was strictly sexism and racism that led to their failure. Clinton was an elitist insider who arrogantly thought the presidency was āher turnā as part of a political dynasty while working with the DNC and the other establishment candidates to sabotage Sandersā campaign. I was pissed learning of her leaked emails collaborating with DNC administrators to thwart Sanders every step of the way.
Harris was a milquetoast politician who was basically appointed to be the Democrat candidate when Biden announced he wouldnāt run for a second term long after the primaries could have been held. Could she have done a better job had she distanced herself from Bidenās foreign policies? Possibly, but she held firm to the status quo which was not gonna fly with a lot of those who knew the horrors Israel was inflicting on Palestinian civilians.
A lot of us on the left have this notion that our candidate has to be near perfect to win their vote and that also tends to hurt their chances. Couple that with the DNC getting high on its own neoliberal farts and you tend to get a losing combination.
AOC doesnāt have the same kind of baggage that made both Clinton and Harris undesirable to many so thereās a better chance she could make it, especially with the way Trump has ratfucked the US and the world at large. Her championing Sandersā policies will also be a big boost to those who want a more affordable and equitable life too.
Iād love for her or someone like her to win. 28 isnāt the right year though. Itās going to be a shitshow and likely years of partisan crap. We need a good progressive dem to win with massive wins in both senate and house to be able to push and solidify policies
28 pres is going to have to punish Trump and cronies which would distract from good policies so Iād rather those wait a few years and they make sure we never have this issue again. Both at once would be great ofc by thatās setting huge expectations.
Having her run in 32 or 36 with 8 years to fully push progressive policies and not have to deal with punishing Trump and others would be amazing
She could be a VP pick in the meantime. Or even cabinet.
In fact, I think she would do more good for turnout and for the party as a VP pick to than as a presidential candidate.
I hate to say it but half the country is either a racist, sexist piece of shit, or is in an abusive and controlling relationship with someone who is. As a result, I think having her as the presidential candidate would do more harm than good.
I just wish the vp was a better role. As a congress woman she can still do a lot and push laws.
I think she can walk and chew gum at the same time. Why do you think she cannot both govern policies and execute the law? First day, make Tom Massie R-Kentucky special council over the Epstein Files and tell him to run that show into the ground. Tell him to speak for young girls everywhere and show some accountability for the monsters in power. Satan almighty Democrats advertise like shit. We can do these things!
Itās more so Iād rather not have her legacy and time spent cleaning up all the shit and instead have even more support from congress so she could pass huge amounts of reforms
Need to flip a lot of seats before a dem president can do much. Republicans donāt care about breaking the law and having a do nothing congress so can skate with low margins there
Same. I love AOC and hold that Clinton and Harris lost primarily because they were unexciting centrists, but Iād prefer not to duplicate any of the variables with the stakes this high.
I understand this and go back-and-forth sometimes internally. But thereās a lot of women-only or women-leading statewide seats, governorships, Senate seats even in conservative states.
I think right-wingers who wouldnāt vote for her anyway are a lot of duplication with sexist voters, and sexism may just be the lowest-hanging excuse theyāll have for hating her. And it will definitely bleed into sexist propaganda in right echo chambers. But Iām not sure it would be enough to stop a good candidate, which I think sheād be.
I would never love to be proven wrong more than about this
Iāll support her and anyone she supports if she fails to secure the nomination for herself.
Newsome thanks you for capitulating early.
The more people who say shit like this now. The less difficult it will be to ratfuck her campaign, rig the primary, and coronate a donor-friendly Neoliberal ghoul. Iāll check back here in a little over two years and see how you feel about my prophecy coming true.
I promise to never think of you ever again.
Try again
See ya in 2028. I absolutely will say I told you so.
I donāt think she has a chance in the general if Iām honest. She wonāt even make it to nomination. However it would help with the Overton window if she ran. We need someone in the race with no gray hairs who will speak truth plainly. Itās amazing how long itās been since we even saw that happen.
Why not? Her policies reflect the will of the voters much more than the other mainstream candidates. Is this another one of those, āonly a centrist can possibly win!ā type arguments? Because every time we say that the centrist loses. If we skip the BS what you are saying is that only a pro israel candidate can possibly win, right?
The last Democratic president was a centrist who won the primary over a very well respected and credible, experienced, white male who was simply further to the left.
We can argue about it more, but I think you are just overestimating the āwill of the voters.ā I campaigned for Bernie in the primaries and then watched the boomers around me nominate Biden. I no longer have any illusions about the rest of the voters, but you apparently do.
Biden won because he had the scent of Obama on him. And no other reason. So I think you have come to completely wrong conclusions.
So people vote against all their own interests because of the scent of Obama? Thatās nonsense, but even if it were true it would only support my point that voters donāt care about what you think they care about. The DNC sucks balls to be sure but the electorate truly canāt be underestimated.
Agree but she needs to do something national for sure. Sheās able to pull an audience on your all over the country, she needs to be elevated beyond congress. I really hope we can start moving away from personality politics. Let the big personalities get people excited and let the good hearted boring folks do the work. Maybe Iām wrong itās just that personality voids attract sociopaths. Not saying AOC is one but if weāve learning anything we need big benches from the local on up not single person leadership. Also I am inherently becoming distrustful of anyone who gains internet fame or looks good on TV and I suspect many other ppl are too
Certainly true of Newsom and the other options advanced by the DNC.
AOC would Crush it. But to get the DNC on board would be tricky or you get a left lane split ticket. We need to flip the electoral college and statehouses, then fill those Congressional seats everytime they come up. An AOC presidency could achieve great things but she needs a receptive congress, and willing states.
But to get the DNC on board would be tricky
Why?
The current chair said he wants a presidential candidate like Mamdani, both in regards to policy and charismaā¦
And he said that right after Mamdani won his primary, when people didnāt think heād win the generalā¦
So why do you think the same DNC wouldnāt support AOC?
What they say and whatās true arenāt really the same when it comes to politicians.
DSA is going to be too busy purity testing and infighting to support her publicly.
Came here to say this.
I love it when I see some overly online person - the same types that would complain that Chomsky is some kind of right-wing stooge - complain about some way that they were betrayed by AOC.
I mean, FFS. I imagine quite a few of these posters are probably just Russian plants meant to split the Democratic party, but I do know some of these types IRL, so some people actually hold these ridiculous views.
The same complaint is made on Zizek as being a right wing plant.
Zizek
I honestly have no idea what to make of Zizek, TBF. Chomsky got me-tooāed over Epstein, it seems, but Iām not someone that believes in the idea of throwing out an entire body of work, so I value a lot of his critique of American empire and so on.
Iāve tried with Zizek and I just havenāt really found a way in. If there is something highly recommended, Iād check it out.
My local DSA is quite up-front about being a ābig tentā, Iād be surprised if others werenāt also.
Mine sincerely wishes it were a smaller tent. Which is why I donāt have time for them.
Nah. We only purity test right wing neoliberals. They are the ones that accept Israeli money and share donors and campaign funds with maga
DSA is run by amateurs who donāt know how to handle the media. While I agree with some of their positions, itās too embarrassing to be represented by them.
They are normal humans and fellow American citizens. If thatās what you mean by ameutureā¦
I would much rather vote for normal humans right now than rich pedophile baby eatersā¦
explain the baby eater part, i missed that
Thereās allegations in the Epstein files that some of our elites have eaten babies.
Thatās also an old QAnon conspiracy and why Comet Ping Pong got shot up a decade ago. Please exercise skepticism and donāt commit any terror attacks.
I donāt care about QAnon or PizzaGate. Never got into those at all. I am going off the Epstein files themselevs.
Imagine saying that after seeing Mamdani communication skills
You should look at who actually runs the DSA.
Politicians like Mamdani are actually an exception and theyāre successful at getting elected because theyāre not communicating like the DSA itself. Theyāre doing quite the opposite.
You liberals are idiots.it is your side who go to fox news to attack dsa
I never had any criticisms of the organization until I joined lmao.
Am I awful for suggesting El sayed with AOC as vice instead?
There are too many misogynistic shitbags and the race is too important.
I want AOC to be our first female president, but 2028 seems like a bad time to risk it. š
Woulda preferred she ran in 2024 instead of Kamala.
Sheās got my vote either way. Just, shit aināt stable, and plenty of the folks that donāt support Donald Trump will never vote for a woman president.
Sigh.
You think a muslim president is easier?
Hearing him talk in an American English accent would probably disarm at least half of the casual racist crowd.
100000%, yes.
Is that a serious question?
Mamdani won with a small different despite how bad Cuomo was.
Both religions extremists put all women beneath men of religions they see as opposing their own, regardless of that womanās religion.
Itās ridiculous to me that anyone would think the general misogynistic christofascist leaning US would endorse a woman before a Muslim man. Asinine.
Reality disagree with you. It is the same BS as the idea that Kamala lost because she is a women when Hilary won the popular vote. Ilhan Omar was targeted because he is a women or being muslim ?
Sorry which religion was it youāre saying respects women?
One, the other?
Itās neither but Iām curious where you stand here. Itll tell me a lot.
What the gell are you talking about? I said a muslim has even less chance than a woman to become a president.
Itās not that clear. Hillary won the popular vote by several million votes. Hillary Clinton - yes, that clusterfuck of a candidate. Yes, there were plenty of misogynists who voted against her on the basis of her being a woman. Many also voted for her because sheās a woman.
Yes, there were plenty of misogynists who voted against her on the basis of her being a woman.
Or, yāknow, because theyāre Republicans. Anyone with misogyny as an overriding political belief system isnāt an available vote for Democrats. They donāt just want a male leader, they want a misogynist that will validate their feelings and shield them from consequences. And the Republicans will always provide that to them, with or without a penis in the pants.
that clusterfuck of a candidate
While I would have preferred a progressive, much of the backlash was absolutely fascist propaganda (and misogyny)
Actually the woman thing is very much unsubstantiated. Were there any exit polls pointing to gender being a significant factor? Given that even MAGAts can elect women into Congress every now and then, I think even the misogynists of America will just deal with it. If anything a Muslim president would be an even bigger risk.
I think the opposition will find or invent levers to work against any candidate, even the most normative one they can find. The identity mud-slinging followed the propaganda, not peopleās sincere beliefs. And the propaganda followed the opposition to socialism.
Iād worry about strong policy messaging before how palatable the human being is to the worst among us, because I donāt think the latterās a winnable fight.
I donāt think thereās a significant difference between El Sayed and AOC on a policy basis. If I had to say something El Sayed would probably be the more principled anti-Zionist, and he doesnāt call himself a scary socialist, but for the most part I donāt think the median Dem voter cares about policy positions on that level. Iād go for AOC just not to risk a Dem seat tbh.
And importantly you donāt need to win the worst among us, just the better 51%.
Hey show me some stats to chew on. I am not out here stating facts just my gut feeling. Why I lead with an apology.
Iād love it if it were true, but my personal experience leans towards El Sayed getting a statistically significant proportion of the votes any woman wouldnāt.
Thatās a problem that needs to be addressed, but like, I am sorry ladies. It needs to be addressed after we secure your right to vote/right the ship meaningfully.
I digress. Iām here for it. I just worry.
Thatās the thing: There are no stats showing that a candidate being a woman is a significant disadvantage in American elections. It feels like it should be, but thereās just zero evidence showing it is. It doesnāt even show up in post-election polling. Meanwhile I couldnāt more recent data but a significant number of Americans across the political spectrum does not like Muslims.
Edit: Found more recent data. In any case I think the point makes itself; if weāre choosing by whose demographic palatable to the American electorate (which is probably not the best method) then itās AOC all the way.
There are too many misogynistic shitbags
Doesnāt matter who runs, fascist propaganda will attack them. Similar concerns about Obama, although not as severe because fascism was less out in the open.
The times are calling for real progressives. I think thatās the only way to overcome the fascists. Not with Right Wing Liteā¢ like Newsom.
El Sayed isnāt DSA. AOC is.
If El Sayed wants to join the party they are more than welcome, but you shouldnāt expect DSA to endorse someone not DSA.
Is AOC currently DSA?
I believe so yes.
Ah she just rejoined . . . .https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/26/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-rejoins-dsa
One requirement is to call themselves a democratic socialist, that would be my guess as the main reason the local DSA chapter wouldnāt officially endorse. I know the chapter still did a whole lot when it came to ground game tho
Local DSA defines their own rules, but generally, you gotta be a dues paying member.
And endorsements come with a chapter commitment of volunteering support.
I think youāre right, and you can call me a āBernie Broā all you wantā¦ If you compare Abdulās prowess in terms of public speaking on the fly with AOCās you will see a big difference and Abdul wins hands-down. He will also get the misogynist vote, which yes, is important, as we saw in 2016.
This has been my biggest critique of AOC for the previous 4 years. After her tussle with Pelosi and getting banged up in that, she started taking only much safer media pieces. She stopped going on basically any media where journalists would challenge her, and also only took āforumā type questions where she had the mic and the questioner didnt.
So there was a solid 3, 3 and a half years of that, and she got soft. She lost her edge from 2017. But Bernie brought her back out with their combined tour. And since then sheās been sharpening her edge. She still wont take contested media spaces. But sheās doing better.
Ro Khanna has been far better at taking controversial media. Same with El Sayed. AOC needs to sharpen her game here.
Iād be so happy with 2 years of El Sayed / AOC leading to 2 years of AOC / El Sayed. At least at this moment in both of their track records and given the current state of the US.
You ask me this in 2022, Iām here for AOC 100%, In just sour on how my party treated Kamala. I donāt trust them to do AOC justice in a campaign after that.
You ask me this in 2022, Iām here for AOC 100%, In just sour on how my party treated Kamala. I donāt trust them to do AOC justice in a campaign after that.
I think with Kamela itās a lot more complicated there though. She basically had the drawbacks of both being a newcomer and an incumbent at the same time.
I think it would be rad to have the scenario you talk aboutā¦ the two of them, but they switch roles.
Kamala tried, but she was never a favorite of anyone even during the primary.
Im sorry but misogynists are not voting for a guy named Abdul El-Sayed either
More of them will. Thatās my point. Especially if fox news keeps sexualizing him.
I think youād be surprised. All you have to do is listen to him to know heās on the up-and-up. I think they would respect his confidence. Whereas AOC is already the new āmost hated woman in politicsā now that Hillary and Pelosi are out of it, in their minds. She has no chance.
I gotta agree, as much as racism and misogyny overlap, I think a lot of people will vote for someone brown before theyāll vote for a woman.
If you donāt put up an AOC with huge numbers then youāre gonna get a John Ossoff or a Gavin Newsom and theyāll either continue to do Joe Zidenism or Trump will win a āthird term because fuck itā
shit aināt stable
Shit being unstable is exactly why we need change. Decades of frustration with neoliberal stability is why things are unstable and why Trump became a thing in the first place. We even had the most centrist old white male saltine cracker we could find for four years trying to restore the stability of the pre-Trump neoliberal order, and what happened? Voters went straight back to Trump.
Thatās not an endorsement of AOC specifically but just saying I donāt think that logic makes sense. If we canāt outline a real alternative to both Trumpism and neoliberalism, and actually deliver on affordability, then Trumpism will just keep returning with different faces. Trump should be the wake-up call that thereās problems with just maintaining the status quo.
She wasnāt even old enough to be president when the primary started. Itās not a rush. Following the traditional get experience in Congress and federal cabinet position is better.
I think AOC could be a strong candidate. I would support her. I also would support Jon Ossoff.
I hope itās not āwhoever elon buysā.
Spoiler: it will be āwhoever Wall St buysā. Elon may or may not decide to buy a few shares in the Dem candidate this cycle.
It will be more like Palantir and Anduril also weighing in.
Palantir (which Thiel co-founded and still chairs) has a significant financial and personnel relationship with Jeffries and his DCCC:
Jeffries received about $25,000 from Palantir executives, plus $44,300 from Palantir manager Mehdi Alhassani to his victory fund, and roughly $22,000 more from Palantir executives for his 2026 campaign. Palantirās lobbying firms funneled at least $3.8 million to the DCCC last year, and $2.9 million in January 2025 alone. Palantir hired Jeffriesā former chief of staff Cedric Grant as a lobbyist in May 2026, along with Steve Elmendorf, a top DCCC fundraiser who hosted events featuring Jeffries.
Itās all a game and we have to pretend that that we have representation
America wonāt vote for a woman America isnāt ready.
evrytime a women ran for president they lost, look at hillary and kamala
Exactly it happened twice before can we give it time why do people have to force it. I literally voted for Kamala but I knew it was throwing it into the wind. AMERICA ISNT READY.
Wow, two whole data points, it must be true.
Donāt you dare make me upvote an ML userā¦
That was a good comeback
And yea, it doesnāt hurt for AOC to run, whether she can win or not. She makes good points and should be heard
That wonāt ever change unless women continue to run. Do you want it to change?
The real issue isnāt that we donāt want/trust a women to be president, Hillary won the popular vote and plenty of people voted for Kamala despite her never being the first kid to be picked for dodgeball. The issue I see is there is a contingency of liberals who are adamant that we must only elect a woman as president now.
I volunteered during Kamalaās campaign and came across this group, it was called something like a woman president no matter what. To this day Iām not sure if they werenāt some psyop group meant to make sure she lost or if this is a genuine group that believes we need to elect a woman whatever the cost. Problem is weāve lost 2 easy elections by running women who just didnāt have any charisma (and like it or not the presidency is a popularity contest and the more charismatic person usually wins.)
Instead of forcing it every election and losing to literal monsters we need to just wait for the right one to come along. AOC might be that very person but shes probably still too young for 2028. Identity politics sucks going both ways and history has shown we can elect minorities and women to government without playing identity politics (minorities and women started getting elected to congress decades ago before all this virulent identity politics shit began.)
The path to hell is paved with good intentions.
And to remind everyone that these stubborn types exist in the liberal camp and can fuck things up when their egoās are allowed to go unchecked just remember Obama tried to get RBG to resign when they couldāve voted in a suitable replacement that wasnāt an antique. She declined because she wanted to be a judge when the first woman president was elected, which never happened. Instead, her stubbornness and lack of hubris cost her one of the single most important rulings she ever issued and one that directly affected millions of women.
Oops. Look, weāre all human and we all make mistakes but the wise old judge is suppose to realize this in thanks to their wisdom. The more I learn about RBG the more I realize that humility isnāt a universal trait. Both political parties and all the factions within them would be wise to learn some humility. Forcing another bad candidate and cheering āyah for women you must vote for herā could cost them another election they could probably win.
Thatās a whole lot of words just to tell everyone you are full of shit.
Youāre talking about āMadame President PACā, a Political Action Committee. Covering the 2025ā2026 election cycle through June 2026, the committee reported only about $522 in total receipts and roughly $422 in total spending. It reported just $100 in cash on hand. Theyāre completely insignificant.
If you want to make up a bunch of nonsense to pretend that feminism has taken over the Democratic party, youāll find plenty of like-minded sexists in the Republican party. Instead, I recommend that you self-reflect on your political ignorance, and try to shake that misogynistic attitude youāve developed.
Hilary lost because the American electoral system is trash. Most of the voters voted for her. Kamala was simply a terrible candidate and she is not as a big cult leader as Trump
By this logic Obama had zero chance of ever becoming the president. 6 different people of color ran for office before Obama won his presidency.
This is a goofy position. Youāre doing the patriarchyās job for them. You better believe people said this same shit about Obama being black, and you also better believe that a lot of racists voted for him anyway (we know this to be true). In practice this sentiment is indistinguishable from saying that you personally do not believe a woman should be president.
Iām sorry I was in the military and know voting and genders and all this shit doesnāt matter voting is made up itās a game to make middle and low class play thinking they have a say. Btw voted for Kamala. So fuck off you dumbasses calling me sexiest. Also voted for Obama twice asshole. Literally didnāt say shit just a sentence and you pull a whole opinion about me out your ass go fuck yourself.
People donāt understand that there are men on the left that donāt want a woman president. Even though the evidence demonstrates this.
Literally didnāt say that voted for Kamala I donāt think other people will I donāt know how everyoneās reading comprehension is this fucking bad.
Sounds like they really arenāt on the āleftā then. Also this is the same argument racist made before Obama was elected into office.
Itās not my argument. Itās an observation.
I donāt know why you think they wouldnāt be āleftā.
Equality and equity are kinda foundational beliefs in leftist ideology.
Those people arenāt on the left, they are opponents of progress. If they refuse to vote against fascism because they hate women more, they arenāt my fucking allies.
So for them to be on the left they have to embrace every view that everyone else does?
deleted by creator
They definitely wonāt vote for a woman if sexist pests like you insist on only nominating men.
Did I ever say that in my post retard?
2016: Clinton (unpleasant creepy woman) vs Trump (worst human in USA) Trump Won
2020: Biden (unqualified white moron man) vs Trump (still worst human in USA) Biden won
2024: Kamala Harris (unqualified āhalf progressiveā non white woman) vs Trump (still worst human in USA) Trump won
2028: AOC (progressive Latina woman) vs Any white republican, pos or not Republican will win
Clinton won the popular vote
